Thinking vs Doing
Deliberately switching between motivational mindsets
Let’s picture a swimmer in open waters, swimming freestyle towards a buoy. Just swimming won’t get them there — the environment is constantly changing, and they could end up far from the buoy. Instead, now and then, they have to stop and look for the buoy so they can correct course.
Psychological research suggests that we have two different motivational mindsets: the doing mindset and the thinking mindset. We are capable of both, but generally, we can only use one at a time.
Doing results in progress and has a lower cognitive cost. Because of this, doing is faster, more efficient, and we perceive results immediately. With all these benefits, it’s no surprise this is our default mindset. It’s worth highlighting doing benefits from uniformity; the fewer the variables, the better we can reproduce learnt behaviours and the faster and more efficiently we progress.
Thinking doesn’t necessarily translate to progress, at least not directly, and it’s cognitively exhausting. On the other hand, we benefit from the variability of ideas and perspectives, eliciting creativity and innovation. When brainstorming, solving a problem, or making a decision, we want options, and they come from thinking.
When our swimmer is swimming, they are doing; when they stop to correct course, they are thinking.
Balance
We might prefer one or the other, but we need both mindsets, so we usually switch between them regularly. The better we get at switching and balancing them, the less frustrated we’ll be and the better results we’ll get.
If we are prone to thinking, we’ll likely have a hard time making decisions and sticking to plans, which could prevent us from getting things done. Instead, if we tend to get going, we’ll likely advance though oftentimes not in the direction we want (potentially, even in its opposite).
One way of balancing these mindsets is by cycling through them. Before doing, you think ahead, consider options and plan as necessary. If you know when you’ll need to stop and think again, you should even plan for that as well. Once the plan and objectives are clear, you start executing them with as few distractions as possible. You’ll eventually get to a point that requires the thinking mindset again, and you’ll have likely gained some experience in the process. Now is the time to reflect and learn from it before planning for the next stint.
We all have been exposed to this. In software development, the basis for agile methodologies is the ability to react to changes quickly. That ability comes from applying relatively short cycles like the one above. In Scrum, we think during refinements, sprint plannings and retrospectives, and we aim to use the doing mindset the rest of the time. Every sprint gives us an opportunity to assess and correct course.
Collaboration
Balancing these mindsets is hard enough to do by ourselves, and it becomes even harder when a group of people must align. We’ve been all in meetings where some people are offering new ideas and diverging, whilst others are trying to decide on a plan they can act upon. This situation is frustrating for everyone but can be prevented. Explicitly calling for a time to diverge and a time to converge, ideally separated, gives everyone time to switch mindsets.
Note the mindset of doing and the act of doing are two different things. The mindset pulls us towards the act of doing; we’ll look for convergence to start acting. This means we can adopt a doing mindset and still not be doing yet.
Final thoughts
Being aware of these mindsets is the first step towards switching deliberatively between them, both in individual and group settings. When in doubt, try clarifying the group’s mindset to reduce friction.
Acknowledgements
Leadership is Language by David L. Marquet
Most of the ideas in this post come from this book. David instructs leaders to guide their mindset by switching between what he calls blue work (thinking) and red work (doing), particularly through their language. He also defines a leader’s playbook for today’s work environments compared to that of the industrial-era playbook.
